I don't care so much about how I look, but about the hurt and the choice not a community or me can do in regards to aging. I mean currently medication and good food and good infrastructure can people have 90 years of life expectancy, if you look at workers in more shitty situations they are dying like 20 years earlier. This is an injustice and it will stay an injustice in communism if there would be ways for people to live longer. That is a debate and choice that has to be then be done.
There is nothing holy in the arbitrary life expectancy that material conditions and evolutions "gave" us. I do see how a "change" in population might be seen as beautiful, but I believe that we will not become immortal (but even if we did), so it just is a question about communist reproduction of society. It might ensure that more people can care for a child? In any case currently it is mostly utopian, but the reality is that we can increase the life span of people by decades as society. That is something that Cuba does and they have my support for that. With medication that is upcoming people will likely have a higher quality of life till the climate catastrophe disrupts the production of those, how to distribute them for me is an analogous question. Especially since a few comrades of mine would be dead already without medication.
What I said is aging is natural and normal and not something that needs to be addressed by medical technology.
So what about age-related (more like age-caused) diseases? Should we not do anything about them? Instead of treating the symptoms, why not address the cause? I don't see this distinction you're making. It seems like an arbitrary one, since a lot of diseases and conditions are "natural."
I don't care so much about how I look, but about the hurt and the choice not a community or me can do in regards to aging. I mean currently medication and good food and good infrastructure can people have 90 years of life expectancy, if you look at workers in more shitty situations they are dying like 20 years earlier. This is an injustice and it will stay an injustice in communism if there would be ways for people to live longer. That is a debate and choice that has to be then be done.
There is nothing holy in the arbitrary life expectancy that material conditions and evolutions "gave" us. I do see how a "change" in population might be seen as beautiful, but I believe that we will not become immortal (but even if we did), so it just is a question about communist reproduction of society. It might ensure that more people can care for a child? In any case currently it is mostly utopian, but the reality is that we can increase the life span of people by decades as society. That is something that Cuba does and they have my support for that. With medication that is upcoming people will likely have a higher quality of life till the climate catastrophe disrupts the production of those, how to distribute them for me is an analogous question. Especially since a few comrades of mine would be dead already without medication.
Nah bro just let them die bro.... It'll be more "beautiful" that way 🤣
I swear the whole "leave nature alone it's more beautiful if we all die without medical technology" is some real western leftist BS.
I'm dying.... LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
You are putting words in my mouth in bad faith. Nowhere did I mention anything about medical technology being unnatural.
What I said is aging is natural and normal and not something that needs to be addressed by medical technology. Those are very different statements.
if we could treat it, we would, and then we’d call it a disease.
Bingo
So what about age-related (more like age-caused) diseases? Should we not do anything about them? Instead of treating the symptoms, why not address the cause? I don't see this distinction you're making. It seems like an arbitrary one, since a lot of diseases and conditions are "natural."